Eh, templating niggling isn't all that important here - the intention is clear. It does need you to go back in time and count; but it shouldn't be too hard to do so.

The "Cast this after combat, it is huge" use seems to fight against swap though; swapping this in to save something would happen before all the things die, leaving you with just the 1/1 from the thing you save.

Which I guess is an interesting play-tension; but the flavour is really confusing to me. It doens't feel like a coherent thing, but two separate ways to use it. (With a third 'Oh, I bounce that as well for an extra 1' on top.)

You don't ever control any creatures that left the battlefield.

This doesn't count itself. You need a ETB trigger on the +1/+1 counter ability.

I think the better variation is one that goes full topsy-turvy and changes the concept into an evasion ability of sorts:

> Dreamwalk (This creature can't be blocked by untapped creatures. Tapped creatures can block it.)

The whole environment should be build with it in mind since it changes the nature of combat in a fundamental way.

The same at least partially applies to prepared, but there the payoff is much smaller in comparison. To me, it seems like an "easier to miss / confusing vigilance" which doesn't sound ecstatic.

Untapping all your creatures is bonkers. Should this be a legend?

Gating, is that you?

The idea of the mechanic is to be vigilance+, where you can proactively activate tap abilities without leaving yourself vulnerable to attacks. It's an ability keyword, so it's just as narrow as menace or hexproof etc.

Well, it's vigilance for abilities as well. My objection is it'll be tricky to see at a a glance whether an opponent has blockers or not.

But it does kinda feel like that one "Aha!" trick isn't really enough of a leg to hang onto.

That seems way too narrow to keyword, and also it's just bad vigilance, so why make it?